Discussion - Enyart vs. Ask Mr Religion (One on One)

[Evoken]

The trinity exists as one God head of three persons. Those three persons are distinct.

Distinct in their relations only, all three share the same one divine essence and possess the same attributes. This is why it can be said that the Father is God, the Son is God and the Holy Spirit is God.

And Jesus, in Matthew 24:36 states quite clearly that He does not sahre all of His fathers knowledge.

You are abusing that verse CabinetMaker and are failing to take into consideration others verses some of which I posted. You are also ignoring St. Paul's claim: "For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead corporeally" (Colossians 2:9). If the fullness of the Godhead dwelleth in him, then all the knowledge of God is in him. Lord Jesus also says: "All things whatsoever the Father hath, are mine." (John 16:15). This is also attributed to the Holy Spirit in that same chapter. Certainly you don't think that what he is referring to are material possessions? Indeed, given what the Holy Spirit is going to do (teach the apostles all truth), he is speaking in this context of attributes such as knowledge, power, etc.

It is not for Jesus to know when the hour will come. When that hour does come, Jesus will be the one who opens the seals and separates the sheep and goats. Jesus knows what He must do, just not when He must do it.

Notice that right before that verse Lord Jesus says: "Amen I say to you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done." (Matthew 24:34). So, Christ does knows that this generation will not pass before that day comes. In light of what is said in Acts 1:6-7, we can understand why he does not reveals the hour and the day to the apostles.

There is simply no reason to suppose that the Father, with whom Christ is one, who Christ knows as the he knows him, who is only known and revealed by Christ, who has given Christ all power and judgement over all things, who is in Christ as Christ is in him, has revealed to Christ that this generation will not pass before the second coming but has refused to reveal him the day and hour. There is no reason to suppose that Christ, who is the image and figure of the substance of God, who was in the beginning with God, without whom no things that are were made and in whom the fullness of the Godhead dwells corporeally does not knows the day and hour of his own coming in glory.

Admitting a knowledge in the Son distinct from the one of the Father disturbs the integrity of the Holy Trinity and is inconsistent with the whole of Scripture and also ignores that not only as God but also as human Lord Jesus is called the Son of God, so this verse can easily refer to his humanity instead of his divinity. Similar to what is done with apparently conflicting claim such as the Father being greater than the Son and the Father and the Son being one.

All your versus show that Jesus is God. They do not prove that Jesus (or even the Holy Spirit) knows everything the Father does.

Why is that such a problem? Why, in your view and the view of other Calvinists, must Jesus know everything the Father does? It does not seem to bother Jesus.

Listen to what you are saying: Jesus is God but he doesn't knows everything that the Father who is also God, knows. The Holy Spirit is God, but he doesn't knows everything that the Father or the Son who are also God know.

Do you not see the incoherence of this concept?

What is the Trinity in your mind? A God formed by three different pieces, like a puzzle? Where each piece adds something unique to the picture? Or instead you think that each person somehow owns a part of the divine essence and each has their own knowledge and attributes which the other doesn't have?

Either each person of the Trinity is truly and fully God, in virtue of possessing the one divine essence or it is not and they are three different gods each with their own essence. It is either one God in three persons or a triad of separate gods. Your claim that the Son has less or different knowledge than the Father is inconsistent with the Trinity and leads you straight into Tritheism or some variation of it. Not only that, but as AMR rightly pointed out, it puts you on the same position as all the heretics of history and removes you from the realm of orthodox Christianity.


Evo

 

[Lon]

Evo, you have put up a lot of good verses but they do not discount my point. The trinity exists as one God head of three persons. Those three persons are distinct. And Jesus, in Matthew 24:36 states quite clearly that He does not sahre all of His fathers knowledge. Scroll back a few pages. I posted to Nang Matthew 24:36 a bunch of translations of the verse. KJV, NKJV, NIV, NASB, Youngs, Darby and more. Some verse included the phrase "or the Son" and some did not. The ALL included the phrase "only the Father knows." It is not for Jesus to know when the hour will come. When that hour does come, Jesus will be the one who opens the seals and separates the sheep and goats. Jesus knows what He must do, just not when He must do it.

All your versus show that Jesus is God. They do not prove that Jesus (or even the Holy Spirit) knows everything the Father does.

Why is that such a problem? Why, in your view and the view of other Calvinists, must Jesus know everything the Father does? It does not seem to bother Jesus.

I guess I need to spell this out very clearly. I'll try just once more for the obvious reason. If it doesn't put this argument to rest, put my name on a question or statement.

Matthew 24:36 states quite clearly that He d[id] not share all of His [F]ather's knowledge.

See the point? The other OVers have and have allowed this issue to proceed forward.

 

[CabinetMaker]

Distinct in their relations only, all three share the same one divine essence and possess the same attributes. This is why it can be said that the Father is God, the Son is God and the Holy Spirit is God.

Then I will have to put your answer in the Jesus lied column. All of your post is aimed at saying Jesus knows everything God knows. So when Jesus said that only the Father knows the hour, Jesus lied. You explanation leaves no room for any other interpretation of the verse.

Listen to what you are saying: Jesus is God but he doesn't knows everything that the Father who is also God, knows. The Holy Spirit is God, but he doesn't knows everything that the Father or the Son who are also God know.

Do you not see the incoherence of this concept?

What is the Trinity in your mind? A God formed by three different pieces, like a puzzle? Where each piece adds something unique to the picture? Or instead you think that each person somehow owns a part of the divine essence and each has their own knowledge and attributes which the other doesn't have?

Either each person of the Trinity is truly and fully God, in virtue of possessing the one divine essence or it is not and they are three different gods each with their own essence. It is either one God in three persons or a triad of separate gods. Your claim that the Son has less or different knowledge than the Father is inconsistent with the Trinity and leads you straight into Tritheism or some variation of it. Not only that, but as AMR rightly pointed out, it puts you on the same position as all the heretics of history and removes you from the realm of orthodox Christianity.

I have no problem with the concept of Jesus not knowing everything the Father knows. Could God have died for our sins? No. Could the Holy Spirit have risen from the dead to redeem us to the Father? No. Each person of the Godhead is distinct with distinct "jobs" and personalities. They are linked in ways I do not begin to understand. Jesus is God the Son, not God the Father. Jesus does not have to have the same knowledge as His Father to be my savior.

By the way, I noted in your post that you made no attempt to address the verse directly. You brought up a lot of different points about Jesus being God and knowing everything God does. But you never said anything like, "When Jesus said only the Father knows the hour Jesus really means..." Would you like to try again?

 

[CabinetMaker]

I guess I need to spell this out very clearly. I'll try just once more for the obvious reason. If it doesn't put this argument to rest, put my name on a question or statement.



See the point? The other OVers have and have allowed this issue to proceed forward.

Your point seems to be that Jesus did not know it as a man but knows it now because He has ascended to the right hand of the Father. You hypothesis is extra-biblical speculation based on your own speculation. The scriptures give us no indications of what Jesus knows now. All we have is what He said when He was with us. And He said that He does not know everything the Father knows. Jesus is God the Son. Jesus is not God the Father nor God the Holy Spirit.

Deal with it.

 

[Nang]

Your point seems to be that Jesus did not know it as a man but knows it now because He has ascended to the right hand of the Father. You hypothesis is extra-biblical speculation based on your own speculation. The scriptures give us no indications of what Jesus knows now. All we have is what He said when He was with us. And He said that He does not know everything the Father knows. Jesus is God the Son. Jesus is not God the Father nor God the Holy Spirit.

Deal with it.

CM,

Are you posting here in the "Grandstands" as a representative of the Open View movement?

Are you an official spokesman for that belief?

Yes, or no. . .

Nang

 

[CabinetMaker]

CM,

Are you posting here in the "Grandstands" as a representative of the Open View movement?

Are you an official spokesman for that belief?

Yes, or no. . .

Nang

I'm as official as you are! :chuckle:

 

[Lon]

Your point seems to be that Jesus did not know it as a man but knows it now because He has ascended to the right hand of the Father. You hypothesis is extra-biblical speculation based on your own speculation. The scriptures give us no indications of what Jesus knows now. All we have is what He said when He was with us. And He said that He does not know everything the Father knows. Jesus is God the Son. Jesus is not God the Father nor God the Holy Spirit.

Deal with it.

Two-edged knife for speculation huh? You see it at least from one side without recognizing it in yourself or theology. The fact is that it is speculative. Are you willing to take such a hard stance on such? I'd hope not. You cannot take a narrative expression and extrapolate such a strong truth without doctrinal backing.

Rev 3:1-3 Expresses Christ coming back without man knowing the day or hour. Does He know now?

Now concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered together to him, we ask you, brothers, 2 not to be quickly shaken in mind or alarmed, either by a spirit or a spoken word, or a letter seeming to be from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come. 3 Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, 4 who opposes and exalts himself against every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, proclaiming himself to be God. 5 Do you not remember that when I was still with you I told you these things? 6 And you know what is restraining him now so that he may be revealed in his time. 7 For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work. Only he who now restrains it will do so until he is out of the way. 8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will kill with the breath of his mouth and bring to nothing by the appearance of his coming.—2 Thessalonians 2:1-8

Here is a nice dissertation on this perplexing consideration (arminian).

Forgive my lapse, there is a verse suggesting Christ knows the day and hour now but it eludes me at this time.

Lon

 

[CabinetMaker]

Two-edged knife for speculation huh? You see it at least from one side without recognizing it in yourself or theology. The fact is that it is speculative. Are you willing to take such a hard stance on such? I'd hope not. You cannot take a narrative expression and extrapolate such a strong truth without doctrinal backing.

Rev 3:1-3 Expresses Christ coming back without man knowing the day or hour. Does He know now?



Here is a nice dissertation on this perplexing consideration (arminian).

Forgive my lapse, there is a verse suggesting Christ knows the day and hour now but it eludes me at this time.

Lon

So, basically, you lack the ability to tackle the verse head on. You too are posting links to all kinds of things in an attempt to avoid dealing with what Jesus said.

Rev 3:3Remember, therefore, what you have received and heard; obey it, and repent. But if you do not wake up, I will come like a thief, and you will not know at what time I will come to you.

This is warning to the church. It warns them that they will not know when He is coming. Note that the verse does not say one way or the other that Jesus knows when He is coming. He very well may.

None the less, you are still faced with Matthew 24:36 where Jesus says only the Father knows. You may be satisfied with tacking it as a "narrative expression". I am do not take the words the Lord spoke directly so lightly.

 

[Clete]

It wasn't strictly narrative anyway! Jesus was directly answering a very pointed question that had everything to do with doctrine.

 

[Nang]

I'm as official as you are! :chuckle:

So, you do not want to answer as to whether you are in the "unsettled theism" camp, or not? If you are a follower of Bob Enyart, which might explain your interest in this discussion, he and his entire "church" should be embarrassed at your display of ignorance of historical Trinitarian doctrine.

Whatever theological teaching you are receiving, it is grossly deficient and certainly not orthodox.

Also, it is my fear you are not alone. The lack of intelligent inquiry to AMR's answers so far, has been quite telling about the counter view, IMO.

It is too bad you do not want to ponder and learn from these deep and rich truths that have been put before you . . .for you may never find better opportunity to learn from truly learned men of God, like you have available to you at this present time.

Nang

 

[Lon]

So, basically, you lack the ability to tackle the verse head on. You too are posting links to all kinds of things in an attempt to avoid dealing with what Jesus said.

Rev 3:3Remember, therefore, what you have received and heard; obey it, and repent. But if you do not wake up, I will come like a thief, and you will not know at what time I will come to you.

This is warning to the church. It warns them that they will not know when He is coming. Note that the verse does not say one way or the other that Jesus knows when He is coming. He very well may.

None the less, you are still faced with Matthew 24:36 where Jesus says only the Father knows. You may be satisfied with tacking it as a "narrative expression". I am do not take the words the Lord spoke directly so lightly.

Not to worry, I'll eventually remember the verse that says this explicitly. Regardless, we still have to think about then verses now.

 

[godrulz]

I am confused about AMR's recent posts on 1on1. I suspect his suspect compatibilism is the problem.

The law of cause and effect applies to inanimate creation.

The law of instinct applies to animals, not men.

The law of love, freedom, moral choice relates to man.

Confusing these categories of how God governs creation leads to confusion.


Long, verbose posts that have flawed assumptions do not trump assertions that are concise, but correct. What makes sense to him in his closed system does not necessarily make sense or stand up to scrutiny.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

I am confused about AMR's recent posts on 1on1. I suspect his suspect compatibilism is the problem.

The law of cause and effect applies to inanimate creation.

The law of instinct applies to animals, not men.

The law of love, freedom, moral choice relates to man.

Confusing these categories of how God governs creation leads to confusion.


Long, verbose posts that have flawed assumptions do not trump assertions that are concise, but correct. What makes sense to him in his closed system does not necessarily make sense or stand up to scrutiny.

Earth to GR. Earth calling GR. Come in, GR. :dizzy:

 

[Lon]

Col 2:3 in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.

Act 1:7 He told them, "You are not permitted to know the times or periods that the Father has set by his own authority."

Barnes' commentary states: "If Jesus had a divine nature, how could he say that he did not know the day and hour of a future event? Some have said that the verb rendered “knoweth” means sometimes to “make” known or to reveal, and that the passage means, “that day and hour none makes known, neither the angels, nor the Son, but the Father.” It is true that the word has sometimes that meaning, as in 1 Cor 2:2, but then it is natural to ask where has “the Father” made it known? (from Barnes' Notes)

Lewis Sperry Chafer says nearly the same of Mark 13:32 where it is recorded that Christ declared that He did not know the day nor the hour of His return, it may be observed that the passage is not unlike 1 Corinthians 2:2 where the Apostle wrote, “For I determined not to know anything among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.” The thought is not to make known, or not to cause another to know. The truth mentioned was not then, as to its time, committed either to the Son or to the angels to publish.” http://www.letusreason.org/Biblexp42.htm See also:
http://www.carm.org/diff/Mark13_32.htm

He said to him the third time, "Simon, son of John, do you love Me?" Peter was grieved because He said to him the third time, "Do you love Me?" And he said to Him, "Lord, You know all things; You know that I love You." Jesus *said to him, "Tend My sheep" (John 21:17 - NASB).

"For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form," Colossians 2:9 NIV

1Co 2:11 For who among men knows the things of a man except the man's spirit within him? So too, no one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God.

Eph 1:22 And He has put all things under His feet and gave Him to be Head over all things to the church

Heb 4:13 Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in His sight, but all things are naked and opened to the eyes of Him with whom we have to do.
Heb 4:14 Since then we have a great High Priest who has passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession.

Heb 13:8 Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever!

Rev 1:1 The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show his servants what must happen very soon. He made it clear by sending his angel to his servant John

http://www.bible.org/page.php?page_id=1223

I'm still having trouble finding the exact verse. I'll keep looking.

 

[RobE]

If such influence can be established then yes, of course. I submit however that no such connection can be made. Unlike Calvinism where clear historical linkage between the doctrine and pagan Greek philosophy can be clearly established to the point that no one even bothers to deny it, Open Theism has no such lineage with anything pagan. On the contrary, the beginnings of the modern Open Theism movement can be directly credited to a small hand full of men who are still alive today. We can read their publications and evaluate the Biblical and rational veracity of their arguments first hand.

If AMR doubts the accuracy of that claim I'd love to see him attempt to substantiate his implicit claim that the modern movement is rooted in anything dating much older than about 1980.

We certainly could examine those men's lives and see what influenced them just as Augustine and all of western thought was influenced by Greek philosophy. Sources such as Whitehead, etc.....

Broken clocks are right twice a day and unless Open Theism can be linked in some significant influential way with these humanists, AMR's point is refuted and it actually back fires on him because there is indeed undisputed evidence that the doctrines of Calvinism are directly derived from the pagan Greeks.

You mean pagan Greek philosophy and the Holy Bible of course. Augustine, and you as well I imagine, employed deductive reasoning(Pagan Greek Philosophy) when reading and interpreting the Scriptures. Read Augustines 'retractions' if you want to see him actually eliminating the things within his own statements which he felt weren't backed up by scripture. Augustine wrote at a time when a major heresy, one which exhalted the free will of man to equality with God's own will(we know the one I'm talking about), was threatening Christianity. Many of his statements went too far, admittedly, in trying to put down that heresy.

We don't know who influenced the thinking of openess(other than I've read some commentary by Pinnock about Whitehead and Pinnock's agreement with process theology), but I can certainly tell you about the 'sandy' foundation of Pinnocks belief system with the following quotes provided by Geisler -----

"Barth was right to speak about a distance between the Word of God and the text of the Bible" (Pinnock, SP, 99).

"The Bible does not attempt to give the impression that it is flawless in historical or scientific ways. God uses writers with weaknesses and still teaches the truth of revelation through them" (Pinnock, SP, 99).

"What God aims to do through inspiration is to stir up faith in the gospel through the word of Scripture, which remains a human text beset by normal weaknesses [which includes errors]" (Pinnock, SP,100).

"A text that is word for word what God wanted in the first place might as well have been dictated, for all the room it leaves for human agency. This is the kind of thinking behind the militant inerrancy position. God is taken to be the Author of the Bible in such a way that he controlled the writers and every detail of what they wrote" (Pinnock, SP, 101).

"The Bible is not a book like the Koran, consisting of nothing but perfectly infallible propositions,... the Bible did not fall from heaven.... We place our trust ultimately in Jesus Christ, not in the Bible.... What the Scriptures do is to present a sound and reliable testimony [but not inerrant] to who he is and what God has done for us" (Pinnock, SP, 100).​

SP--Clark Pinnock, The Scripture Principle (San Francisco, Harper & Rowe: 1984).

 

[CabinetMaker]

So, you do not want to answer as to whether you are in the "unsettled theism" camp, or not? If you are a follower of Bob Enyart, which might explain your interest in this discussion, he and his entire "church" should be embarrassed at your display of ignorance of historical Trinitarian doctrine.

Whatever theological teaching you are receiving, it is grossly deficient and certainly not orthodox.

Also, it is my fear you are not alone. The lack of intelligent inquiry to AMR's answers so far, has been quite telling about the counter view, IMO.

It is too bad you do not want to ponder and learn from these deep and rich truths that have been put before you . . .for you may never find better opportunity to learn from truly learned men of God, like you have available to you at this present time.

Nang

Nang, I don't attend Denver Bible Church, I attend Christ Community Covenant Church, a member of the evangelical covenant denomination.

As to learning from AMR or Nang or Evo or Lon, consider that none of you has answered my question. All of you have made post after post about the two natures of Jesus. All these posts go on and on about how Jesus is both fully God and full man. I have no issue with any of these posts. I believe Jesus is God.

The question I have asked is how do relate your doctrine that Jesus must know everything the Father knows to a verse, spoken by Jesus, that says He doesn't know everything the Father knows. Its that simple Nang. Your doctrine says one thing, Jesus says something different. How do you deal with that?

After pages and pages of posts on this subject, I am left with the distinct impression that that single verse is so hard to deal with within your doctrinal constraints, that you find it easier to just stir up a big smoke screen and not deal with it.

 

[CabinetMaker]

Col 2:3 in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.

Act 1:7 He told them, "You are not permitted to know the times or periods that the Father has set by his own authority."



He said to him the third time, "Simon, son of John, do you love Me?" Peter was grieved because He said to him the third time, "Do you love Me?" And he said to Him, "Lord, You know all things; You know that I love You." Jesus *said to him, "Tend My sheep" (John 21:17 - NASB).



Eph 1:22 And He has put all things under His feet and gave Him to be Head over all things to the church



http://www.bible.org/page.php?page_id=1223

I'm still having trouble finding the exact verse. I'll keep looking.

Please do. The verses you have quoted here are statements of the Apostles about Jesus, They do not know everything Jesus knows. Jesus attests to that fact in Acts 1:7.

 

[Lon]

Please do. The verses you have quoted here are statements of the Apostles about Jesus, They do not know everything Jesus knows. Jesus attests to that fact in Acts 1:7.

I have no idea what you just said or mean. AMR has discussed how dangerously close OV is to the edge of heresey. Millard Erickson, a leading authority on orthodox and heterodox theology and their differences supports AMR's statements (or vise-versa). Some of your extrapolations are dangerously close. The Arians also believe Jesus to be much different than the Father. The Mormons do not believe God knew (knows) everything and cast Him in human-likeness. Regardless of what our discussions are, I caution against exrapolating OV difficulties to that extreme.

 

[Lon]

Nang, I don't attend Denver Bible Church, I attend Christ Community Covenant Church, a member of the evangelical covenant denomination.

As to learning from AMR or Nang or Evo or Lon, consider that none of you has answered my question. All of you have made post after post about the two natures of Jesus. All these posts go on and on about how Jesus is both fully God and full man. I have no issue with any of these posts. I believe Jesus is God.

The question I have asked is how do relate your doctrine that Jesus must know everything the Father knows to a verse, spoken by Jesus, that says He doesn't know everything the Father knows. Its that simple Nang. Your doctrine says one thing, Jesus says something different. How do you deal with that?

After pages and pages of posts on this subject, I am left with the distinct impression that that single verse is so hard to deal with within your doctrinal constraints, that you find it easier to just stir up a big smoke screen and not deal with it.

If you had any real inclination to get to the bottom of your question, you'd have read the links provided and AMR's excellent treatise on this topic.

In reading you would have run across a repeated phrase "This is a difficult passage."

After that assessment (repeatedly) you'd recognize perhaps, that the scholars tell us it is a 'difficult' passage.

No qualms there. What I tried to do was give you balance in this discussion. It is no more easier for the OV. It is a difficult passage to try and explain. Simply saying "That was then, this is now" shows that we do not have to be constrained to that moment in time. Does Jesus now know? I think He does from the verses given. There is one other that I'm trying to remember that is pretty clear He does know. I will find it eventually. Until then, the verses given hint enough that we don't have to be truly perplexed: Jesus is God. He created the universe and all is subject to Him. He exercises divine knowledge in passage after passage to suggest that He did not divest His divine attributes while man but acted in human capacity for our sakes.

 

[Lon]

In looking at Evangelical Covenant Theology, there is an emphasis on the creeds and avoiding splitting hairs in theological discussion.

The doctrinal statement is sound. I'd like to know what your pastor says about our discussion. Ask for me please.